- Sep 5, 2010
- 92,806
- 129,104
Could theoretically move Randle, shift Ingram to PF, start PG/Jackson on the wings (interchangeable) and D'Lo at point. Voila.
**LA LAKERS THREAD** Sitting on 17! 2023-2024 offseason begins
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by licensed to ball,
- Start date
- Nov 1, 2011
- 2,433
- 1,128
Yea that would not work at all.
I like Fox and Jackson but I don't see them ever being great offensive players. They play hard and hustle but the idea that either one could be go to players is far fetched to me.
If Ball isn't the pick, I'd rather trade down for DSJ. He has the highest upside to me.
- May 15, 2007
- 5,036
- 502
Last edited:
- Mar 21, 2010
- 22,895
- 26,768
I think you'll see them look to sign a cheap option in FA or end up dealing Clarkson for a shooter (or hope he turns into a consistent one). but i think they are gonna roll with JJ at the 2 for a good chunk of minutes, He may not be the Day 1 starter tho. Either way i love his Skillset amongst the other Youngins. I Project borth D'Lo & Ingram to be 20+ point scorers in the Future. so having an Elite athlete, who can defend & create for others will be very solid for this team. If he does develop a shot then this Core starts to look scary
- Apr 24, 2006
- 18,754
- 13,104
Maybe FO is operating under the saying "take the best player available and worry about positions later ". You can always trade players. If they feel JJ is the best player available I say take him
Last edited:
- Mar 20, 2017
- 24,017
- 31,479
- Nov 1, 2011
- 2,433
- 1,128
Well if Ingram is untouchable and PG is coming, who are you trading?
I agree with going BPA, just don't think Jackson is it.
Yea I get this line of thinking. Just don't think he's a 2 unless he can becomes a really good shooter.
- May 17, 2007
- 25,131
- 23,959
I just think the lack of shooting on this team is too big of a hole to pass up on Lonzo.
- Dec 15, 2012
- 17,264
- 27,199
This team needs defense more than offense at this point. Draft the kid who has show he has good defensive instincts and hope the shot comes in a year or two. Realistically this team isnt competing next year anyways.
Last edited:
- May 17, 2007
- 25,131
- 23,959
I can see this. This is besides the point, but why aren't yall gunna kill P for calling Ingram a 4 like y'all did to me?
- Dec 15, 2012
- 17,264
- 27,199
I don't think he has the frame for it right now. He may eventually get there. I think it will depend on how much weight he adds to his frame over the next two years.
- Dec 27, 2006
- 2,160
- 774
I like DSJ, too. Just see that Russ athleticism/dame playmaking ability and rumors of a 48 ' vertical... (ever since he **** on the dukies, been a fan)
pick 2 for 5 and 10 to pick up Smith, he's projected at 10 on DX, but I don't think he'll slip that far as he'll probably be great in a workout setting. He'd be a star on the Knicks.
- Dec 17, 2005
- 23,933
- 5,933
- Sep 5, 2010
- 92,806
- 129,104
I don't envy Magic and Pelinka at all, having to choose between the hometown kid that could potentially ignite this team with shooting/playmaking or the do-it-all athletic swingman the league is all about these days. And that's not even including Fox, who is a mix of both.
- Dec 17, 2005
- 23,933
- 5,933
I don't think anyone is dumb enough to pick players or pass on players based on the assumption that PG will be signed next summer.
No matter what assumptions people wanna make, it is far from guaranteed and no one knows what will happen until next summer.
So I doubt Magic and Rob would pass on JJ or Fox if they truly believe either are the best picks because of worries of a log jam at positions in 2019.
Take the player you think is the best fit for the system Luke wants to run, then deal with the PG bridge when we arrive to it IMO.
No matter what assumptions people wanna make, it is far from guaranteed and no one knows what will happen until next summer.
So I doubt Magic and Rob would pass on JJ or Fox if they truly believe either are the best picks because of worries of a log jam at positions in 2019.
Take the player you think is the best fit for the system Luke wants to run, then deal with the PG bridge when we arrive to it IMO.
- Dec 15, 2012
- 17,264
- 27,199
Exactly. I'm pretty sure at this point some team with probably give the Pacers way more than they should out of desperation. I don't even want to know what is going to happen if the Cavs lose.
- May 17, 2007
- 25,131
- 23,959
Forget PG then, you CANNOT start a lineup of Dlo/JJ/Ingram/Randle/(Moz or Zubac) NEXT year if you're serious about challenging for a 8th seed and not tanking for 2018.
This isn't the 1980s. Unless BI shows significant improvement from 3 (which is entirely possible), you might be running out the worst shooting team since the "small ball" era started. Unless we slow the pace to a halt and try to hold teams below a 100 points every game (which doesn't seem to be Luke's style at all), I don't see how it would work.
This isn't the 1980s. Unless BI shows significant improvement from 3 (which is entirely possible), you might be running out the worst shooting team since the "small ball" era started. Unless we slow the pace to a halt and try to hold teams below a 100 points every game (which doesn't seem to be Luke's style at all), I don't see how it would work.
Last edited:
- May 8, 2013
- 3,234
- 1,391
Can jj be like kwahi?
- Nov 1, 2011
- 2,433
- 1,128
Lol right.
Like I said I agree with going BPA, but if it's close you have to look at how your roster is constructed.
JJ is not vastly better than anyone else on the board and he's a whole year older. If he was a can't miss prospect I would be all for it.
- May 17, 2007
- 25,131
- 23,959
UCLA assistants meeting with Luke, Rob & Magic today. [emoji]129300[/emoji]
Fox workout scheduled for tomorrow morning. Wonder what the leaks will be after
- Sep 5, 2010
- 92,806
- 129,104
I think he's more Iguodala then Kawhi. But maybe Self, KU and the college game restricted him?
- Apr 24, 2006
- 18,754
- 13,104
Assuming there are no trades. Who's to say we draft JJ and don't trade Randle? Or anyone else?
- May 17, 2007
- 25,131
- 23,959
Because as soon as you draft JJ, Randle/Nance's value falls off a cliff because everyone knows you need to trade him. Bad business.
I guess theoretically, you could start Deng at the 4 with Ingram & JJ
I guess theoretically, you could start Deng at the 4 with Ingram & JJ
Last edited:
- Dec 15, 2012
- 17,264
- 27,199
I suppose I dont understand why you would need to trade Randle immediately if you drafted Josh Jackson?
- May 17, 2007
- 25,131
- 23,959
You wouldn't NEED to. You just wouldn't win any games with Dlo as your only player capable of shooting in the starting 5.
You'd probably need to start a stretch big if you run out JJ and BI at the wings.
You'd probably need to start a stretch big if you run out JJ and BI at the wings.
